Bill C-22

Canada Disability Benefit Act

An Act to reduce poverty and to support the financial security of persons with disabilities by establishing the Canada disability benefit and making a consequential amendment to the Income Tax Act

This enactment establishes the Canada disability benefit to reduce poverty and to support the financial security of working-age persons with disabilities. It sets out general provisions for the administration of the benefit and authorizes the Governor in Council to implement most of the benefit’s design elements through regulations. It also makes a consequential amendment to the Income Tax Act .

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Minister Qualtrough, we have people with disabilities in my family who commend the work this government has done for those with disabilities.

I know that you're not only a dedicated minister, but you've also launched many other initiatives. In addition to Bill C‑22, you have several other initiatives in your portfolio, such as the opportunities fund for persons with disabilities, the ready, willing and able initiative, financial assistance for the visually impaired and print-disabled, and capacity-building measures.

I'd like you to tell us a little more about Bill C‑22, but also about all the other action you're taking to improve the situation for people with disabilities.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all the ministers for being here today.

My questions will be for Minister Qualtrough.

Recently, the Senate returned Bill C-22, the Canada disability benefit act, with several amendments. Canadians want to see this legislation come into force quickly.

Minister, are you accepting all of the Senate amendments?

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you very much.

I'd like to start with Ms. Brayton.

There's some good news. We just got word that Bill C-22, the national disability benefit, passed the Senate today. You mentioned that in your testimony, so I'm pleased to have seen in the middle of this committee meeting that it was posted.

I want to say to Ms. Brayton that I am very happy you are here speaking to this committee because of everything you described about women and girls with disabilities being invisible, and particularly that those who are intersectional with disabilities being invisible. You're the first one who's testified before this committee who has specifically talked about that. I'm very pleased you're here.

We know what the problems are, and.... I'll give you a few minutes, and then I do have another question. Can you tell us really quickly what the solutions are? When we're doing our recommendations as a committee, what should we be recommending?

[Neil Hetherington, Chief Executive Officer, Daily Bread Food Bank]

Thank you for having me here today.

My name is Neil Hetherington, and I have the awesome privilege of representing the Daily Bread Food Bank—Canada's largest food bank. We are based in Toronto and have a mission to ensure that everyone's right to food is realized.

I'm here today to speak about the grocery rebate included in the 2023-24 budget. I'm grateful to have the opportunity to share what we are seeing on the ground at our food banks across the city and why you, our elected representatives, should be gravely concerned about the state of food insecurity in Canada right now.

Before the pandemic, we used to see about 60,000 client visits every single month. During the pandemic, that doubled to 120,000 client visits per month. This past March, we were horrified that there were 270,000 client visits recorded. We can do better.

Where we used to see some 2,000 individuals make use of the food bank for the very first time, we are now seeing some 12,000, every single month, come to the Daily Bread Food Bank. The underlying reasons for this are complex, but I can summarize them in one sentence: People do not have enough income to afford the rapidly rising cost of living.

With unemployment being at record lows, it begs the question. Why are we seeing such historic increases in food bank usage? Food bank usage has always had a correlation between its use and unemployment. As a result, I have sleepless nights—and a few newly found grey hairs—thinking about what will happen if unemployment begins to rise.

Many of the people who are coming to our food banks in Toronto are relying on fixed incomes, particularly social assistance. I worry very much about those receiving income from disability. Those funds in Ontario total about $1,200 per month for an individual to survive on. It is a full $900 below the poverty line. In the past year, we have seen the proportion of people with income derived from employment as the primary source double from 15% to 33%. No longer is there a promise that, if you get an education and you work hard, you will not need food charity.

Seventy per cent of our clients at food banks are paying more than half of their incomes on housing, which is putting them at a high risk of homelessness. Almost one in five food bank clients is putting 100% of their income toward housing, leaving nothing for food and for other expenses. They are totally relying on charity, friends and family.

Every household in Canada feels the impact of food inflation, which remains at 9.6%. However, for those accessing food banks, this is simply the tip of the iceberg. These households were already living with precarity before skyrocketing inflation.

Let's turn to the question at hand: Will the grocery rebate make a difference?

Any money in the pockets of low-income Canadians is generally a good thing. Using the GST credit as a vehicle makes sense since this is an income-tested benefit that will target low-income Canadians. It does not require somebody to be working to receive it, which means that people living with disabilities, who are unable to work, will still receive the benefit. We also appreciate this approach, which is grounded in dignity and in low-barrier access. Rather than having to apply for the benefit, Canadians who have filed their income tax will automatically receive the benefit.

However, none of this answers the question of whether it will make a difference. Ultimately, while the benefit is helpful, our analysis is that the temporary grocery rebate will not shorten the lineups outside of food banks across Canada. The good news is that we know exactly what will.

Our colleagues at PROOF, a research institute housed at the University of Toronto, have published extensively on this matter. They found that the Canada child benefit and the guaranteed income supplement have both had significant impacts on reducing the severity of food insecurity, and these programs should be celebrated and replicated.

I've had the opportunity to testify at the Senate about Bill C-22, and I expressed my strong support for the Canada disability benefit. Depending on its design, this benefit has the potential to reduce and even to eliminate poverty and food insecurity among Canadians with disabilities. We hope this bill will continue to receive all-party support.

Despite these important steps forward, significant gaps in our social safety net remain. In particular, single working-age individuals represent close to half of the food bank clients across the country and also make up half of those living in deep poverty in Canada. Another gap is around those who have recently become unemployed. The government announced a process to reform EI, but we have not yet seen the outcomes. As a result, thousands of Canadians continue not to qualify because the program does not reflect modern realities such as gig work and self-employment.

Poverty reduction requires long-term sustained investment. We are grateful that the government has signalled a strong commitment to supporting low-income Canadians through the grocery rebate and through the Canada disability benefit, EI reform and ongoing investments in the Canada child benefit and guaranteed income supplement.

We have the tools to tackle food insecurity. We at the Daily Bread are here to push you and to support you as we work collectively to reduce poverty nationally.

Thank you.

Inclusion of Students with Disabilities

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, just before I begin this debate on educational support and inclusion for persons with disabilities, I start by reminding the government that it has outstanding disability commitments. I am referring specifically to Bill C-22, the Canada disability benefit bill.

The government promised this income support bill years ago and one million Canadians who need it are still waiting. With the rising costs of living, the situation is past dire and the government should immediately enact a disability emergency response benefit to offset the rising costs of food and housing for persons with disabilities living in poverty in Canada. Bill C-22, the Canada disability benefit act, will be coming back from the Senate soon and the government needs to get it on the House agenda immediately after it arrives from the Senate; there is no time to waste.

Let me talk about the motion in front of us, Motion No. 78, brought forward by the member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin. I thank him for carrying on this conversation in this House. The motion states the following:

...where the federal government spends money on education, domestically or internationally, clear consideration must be given to the maximum inclusion of people with disabilities, including people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Today, the member talked about why that wording is so important. Of course, the NDP supports this. Where we are disappointed is that it is not already a reality in Canada.

Canada, like other signatories to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, has an obligation to uphold the right to education for persons with disabilities outlined in article 24, but currently it is not doing that.

In my riding of Port Moody—Coquitlam, Anmore and Belcarra school boards and teachers are doing that work without a federal partner to ensure the adequate funding, education and supports to fully meet article 24. I was at our school board meeting recently applauding the work that the school board is doing, along with its staff, teachers, EAs and administration. They are doing that work to try to optimize their limited resources and supports to address the needs of students with disabilities, including those with learning disabilities.

The number of students with disabilities who are not getting their needs met in Canada's education system is growing and parents and guardians are coming to me, at my office in my riding, asking for help.

Another reason I rise today is to stand up with the voices of students, parents and guardians in Canada who are telling me that it is imperative that Canada adhere to this article.

Education is a fundamental human right and is essential for the full inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities in society. Adhering to article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities means that Canada must ensure that persons with disabilities have access to inclusive and quality education at all levels of their life learning journey, without discrimination and on an equal basis with others. This includes removing barriers to education, providing reasonable accommodations, and ensuring that teachers and other educational staff are trained to support the needs of persons with disabilities.

In Canada, it has been said tonight that education is primarily funded and administered by the provincial and territorial governments. What has the Liberal government done to ensure it is supporting provinces and territories to adhere to article 24? I can say right now that they are not doing enough.

With the provincial and territorial governments responsible for funding and administering public elementary and secondary schools, as well as public colleges and universities, they need a federal partner so they can set curriculum standards, and oversee certifications and professional development that supports our commitments to article 24. Right now, they are on their own doing all this work and not getting the financial support, administration or education support they need from the federal government to meet the convention.

The federal government does provide some funding for education through transfer payments to the provinces and territories, as well as through specific programs and initiatives. However, there is not a specific focus on funding to ensure provinces and territories have the financial capacity to meet the obligations that Canada makes on the international stage.

This is especially true for indigenous students. The federal government provides funding for research and development in higher education, and supports programs aimed at improving outcomes for indigenous students. This is their obligation, yet even for indigenous students, the funding for disability supports in on-reserve education does not align with provincial standards, and that is unacceptable. It must be corrected.

In Canada, every student is entitled to a barrier-free education. It sets them on their path for life. Furthermore, ensuring that persons with disabilities have access to inclusive education that meets their needs is not only a matter of human rights, but also has significant health, social and economic benefits. Education leads to better employment opportunities, better health outcomes, increased social participation, and enhanced self-esteem and confidence.

We know that investing in education for persons with disabilities promotes inclusivity by ensuring that everyone has access to the same opportunities for learning and personal growth.

I just want to make a note here, because the member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin mentioned field trips. In my riding of Port Moody—Coquitlam, Anmore and Belcarra, there are times when field trips are not accessible to everyone because of the funding limitations, because of the fact that they do not have the supports that are required. We can imagine kids having to go to school and seeing all their friends go on the field trip while they do not. That needs to be corrected.

Investing in education for persons with disability promotes inclusivity by ensuring that everyone has access to the same opportunities. It helps to break down barriers and promotes a more equitable and diverse society. It also promotes independence and self-determination by providing education and training opportunities. I know that the Liberal government is investing right now in those education and training opportunities. How about starting earlier? How about supporting the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, article 24, in provinces and territories? How about doing that?

We know that it promotes independence and self-determination by providing education and training opportunities. With supportive education, persons with disabilities could acquire the skills and knowledge they need to live more independently.

Education is also linked to improved employment outcomes. Investing in education for persons with disabilities could help to improve their employment prospects and reduce their risk of living in poverty. Right now, a million Canadians with a disability are living in poverty because they live in an ableist country that does not allow them full access to employment. How about the Liberal government fixes that? Education is an important driver of economic growth, and investing in education for persons with disabilities can contribute to the overall economic prosperity of the country.

For all the reasons above, the government needs to support provinces and territories with the funding and the education required to uphold article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. UN Conventions are not pieces of paper. They are rights, human rights, and they need to be adhered to.

I am surprised to see, for the second year that I am here as the NDP critic for persons with disabilities, that the government does not have a Canadian delegation going to the United Nations in June. For the second time, I am standing here and not seeing any coordinated Canadian effort to have a delegation at the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It is unacceptable. Why are we not there?

In closing, as we look outside of Canada, we see that the federal government provides funding to Canadian organizations that apply for international assistance, which could include educational projects. The Liberal government says those projects must align with the feminist international assistance policy, advance human rights and advance sustainable development goals. Yes, that is good. However, there are insufficient directives to ensure that people with disabilities are included in Canadian international assistance projects, so the government must restore the international assistance funding it cut and do better to meet its international commitments to human rights.

Persons with Disabilities

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary correctly pointed out that the disability community will be involved in the design of the disability benefit because they called for it. Throughout the process of Bill C-22, they made clear the importance of that, so I brought forward an amendment that would require the government to meaningfully engage the disability community in the regulation.

What remains true today is that if the government really was serious, it would not wait for this whole process of regulations and everything else. Just like child care the government would have started by funding it and then moving forward with the rest. Why not do the same here?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the member for Kitchener Centre for his advocacy on behalf of Canadians with disabilities.

Furthermore, I would like to thank him for his excellent work in getting Bill C-22 through committee and improving that bill along the way. My thanks again for his tremendous advocacy and great teamwork.

I want to especially acknowledge the advocacy and work of the hon. Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion. The minister has been working tirelessly throughout her career to promote the rights of persons with disabilities.

The minister understands the challenges that so many persons with disabilities face each and every day. She understands that many working-age persons with disabilities face a challenging income gap. That is why she has been working tirelessly to create a groundbreaking Canada disability benefit, which the member referenced, an income supplement with the potential to seriously reduce poverty and improve financial security for hundreds of thousands of working-age persons with disabilities.

Like my colleague, the minister wants to see Canadians with disabilities receive the new Canada disability benefit as quickly as possible. I remind the hon. member that, as set out in the legislation, details of the Canada disability benefit will be addressed in further regulations including the benefit amount, eligible criteria and other features. We will work out all of these details in consultation with our partners, including the disability community. We will continue to work closely with the provinces and territories to ensure that the Canada disability benefit will align with and complement services, benefits and supports. I am pleased to report that conversations in this regard are going very well. There is a shared commitment to improving the lives of persons with disabilities across this country.

The Canada disability benefit has the potential to make a profound difference in the lives of hundreds of thousands of working-age Canadians with disabilities. For that to happen we need to take the time to do things the right way. That is exactly what we are doing.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam, my friend, for her question, advocacy on behalf of Canadians with disabilities and, furthermore, her excellent teamwork in getting Bill C-22 through committee and improving that bill at committee. I wanted to thank the hon. member for her tremendous advocacy and her great teamwork.

I want to especially acknowledge the advocacy of the hon. Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion. She has been working tirelessly throughout her career to promote the rights of persons with disabilities. The minister understands the challenges that so many persons with disabilities face each and every day. She understands that many working-age persons with disabilities face a challenging income gap. That is why the minister has been working tirelessly to create the historic Canada disability benefit, an income supplement that has the potential to seriously reduce poverty and improve financial security for hundreds of thousands of working-age persons with disabilities.

Like my colleague, I too want nothing more than to see Canadians with disabilities receive the new Canada disability benefit as quickly as possible. I remind my colleague that, as set out in the legislation, the details of the proposed Canada disability benefit will be addressed in future regulations. These details include the benefit amount, eligibility criteria and other features such as the treatment of employment income. We will work out all of those details in consultation with our partners, including persons with disabilities and disability stakeholders, as well as with provinces and the territories. In the spirit of “nothing without us”, we will continue engaging the disability community at every turn to ensure that the benefit is designed with their voices at the table.

I am pleased to say that engagement activities began in the summer of 2021 and that work has not stopped. We have also been working closely with provincial and territorial governments because they play a key role in providing benefits and supports to many Canadians with disabilities. This will help us ensure that every person who receives the Canada disability benefit will be better off. It will also help us harmonize delivery of the CDB and ensure that there are no clawbacks to other benefits.

The Canada disability benefit has the potential to make a profound difference in the lives of hundreds of thousands of working-age Canadian with disabilities. For that to happen we need to take the time to do things the right way. That is exactly what we are doing.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am here in the House again to ask for financial support for persons with disabilities. I want to start with a story so that the government can understand how this is actually impacting people in my community.

Last week, a mother in her 70s came in to talk about her adult son who lives on his own and is about to be demovicted from an apartment he has lived in for almost 17 years. He cannot afford the new rent on the income he has at this point in time. This is what is really happening to people in this market-driven housing frenzy that the Liberal government has fed.

Once again, I rise in the House to shine a light on the urgency for persons with disabilities to have immediate income support as they continue to wait for a Canada disability benefit. While provincial and territorial income support programs have been virtually stagnant for years, the community is facing an ever-shrinking income while struggling to cope with the rising cost of food and the skyrocketing price of housing.

Through the course of the HUMA committee study on Bill C-22, the Canada disability benefit act, we heard that about one million Canadians living with a disability are in poverty. We heard from the minister and her ESDC officials that the average gap between provincial and territorial support and the poverty line for persons with disabilities is $9,000, and there is no way to fill that gap. Overwhelmingly, we heard that these one million people are not eating enough meals daily and that their housing can be unacceptable and often inaccessible.

It is essential that the federal government step up immediately with an emergency benefit. Therefore, I ask again for the Minister of Disability Inclusion to provide this emergency response benefit for persons with disabilities while Canadians wait for the currently unfunded Canada disability benefit.

Canadians with disabilities face exclusion from society on a daily basis. The recent Auditor General's report on accessible transportation found that, in 2019 and 2020, nearly two-thirds of the 2.2 million persons with disabilities who travelled on planes, trains and other federally regulated modes of transportation faced barriers. Even worse, the risk of damage to their essential assistive devices is beyond unacceptable. Transportation is essential to people's daily lives, including for people with disabilities. The government should understand that. Persons with disabilities are more likely to rely on public transportation as they navigate this incredibly ableist world.

Education is another place where people with disabilities are facing barriers and exclusion every day, whether in the aging infrastructure that years of out-of-date schools have put in front of people; insufficient funding for school boards to fully include children with disabilities; or challenges related to accessing and applying for student loans, grants, tax credits and other programs that are supposed to give access to better education. It is just not working. Even in seeking employment, people with disabilities are excluded, with inaccessible workplaces, biases of employers and the stresses of coping with too many other challenges on top of employment.

The NDP knows that people with disabilities need assistance today. This includes better access to income supports, publicly funded pharmacare and dental care as part of improving the lives of persons with disabilities.

With the Canada disability benefit at least a year away, I implore the Liberal government to help persons with disabilities now with an emergency relief benefit. The disability community deserves it.

[Michael Wernick]

When I was the clerk, I contributed to three bills, C‑22, C‑59 and C‑76. The investments provided in the 2018 budget are among the priorities I advocated. This is the budget that made it possible to establish the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, the CCCS. It also provided for significant investments in the Communications Security Establishment, the CSE.

I worked on the elections protocol announced in January 2019. Interference was still a concern. And yet the government had tabled Bill C‑59 in June 2017.

Food Day in Canada Act

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, I hope that the government heard the speech by the member from the Bloc Québécois today.

As people living in Canada are faced with the highest food prices they have ever experienced, it is time for the government to increase food security in this country. The NDP acknowledges that this bill could play a small part in that, yet there is still work to do so no one in Canada is going to bed hungry.

My colleague from Cowichan—Malahat—Langford has been a champion in addressing the immediate food insecurity problem in this country, which is the price gouging for corporate profits at the grocery store. The leader of the NDP has been holding grocery chain CEOs accountable for this price gouging. The truth is that, while the grocery oligarchs in this country are making billions in profit, more children are going to bed hungry. This cannot stand because it is driving up food insecurity and hurting Canadians.

I recently asked the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development to explain how food insecurity in this country could be trending up when poverty rates are going down. The minister responded that the government realizes this disconnect and is now linking their poverty reduction council and their food policy council to talk about this. She admitted that, for too long, food was not included when talking about poverty, and this is something that is now being addressed. Food, a fundamental need, was not part of the considerations when the government was dealing with poverty. It seems unbelievable.

However, there is hope. The minister admitted that the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food cannot do this work alone, and that the current shared mandate between those two ministries is needed to solve food insecurity. I agree and say to both of these ministers that they need to advance the solutions faster People are going hungry, especially those living in poverty.

Almost one million people living in poverty in this country are persons with disabilities, and they are still waiting for financial support to come through the Canada disability benefit. The cost of groceries means they are skipping meals, as well as eliminating fresh fruits and vegetables from their diets. The Canada disability benefit, which would be established with the passing of Bill C-22, is needed now to offset this reality. Throughout the course of the committee study on Bill C-22, we heard about the suffering of people with disabilities living in poverty. Overwhelmingly, we heard that they are not eating enough meals daily and cannot keep up with the rising cost of food.

It is essential that the federal government step up with an emergency benefit immediately, so I again ask the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion to provide a disability emergency response benefit while Canadians wait for the currently unfunded Canada disability benefit.

Today, with the increasing cost of food, a growing number of households are becoming food insecure. People are relying now more than ever on charities, not-for-profits and places of worship in their communities to put a meal on the table. I want to take a moment to highlight some of those invaluable community partners in my riding of Port Moody—Coquitlam. These are the organizations that are feeding the families that are unable to make ends meet: Share Food Bank, Immigrant Link Centre Society, The People’s Pantry, Coquitlam Alliance, Tapestry and Hillside churches, Soroptimist International of TriCities, Tri-Cities Moms Group, Coquitlam farmers' market, Fresh Roots, School District No. 43, and the city of Coquitlam, which stepped up to quickly adapt their city kitchens during the pandemic and have sustained an affordable meal delivery program for vulnerable seniors in Coquitlam.

I thank them all for what they do to offset food insecurity and improve lives in our community. Thank goodness for these community groups. Strong local food systems are crucial to ensuring food security for all Canadians, and so too is a caring community that does the work to leave no one behind when government has not done its work to protect the most vulnerable. There is still much work to do in the House to enact laws and programs that protect Canadians from food insecurity.

As my NDP colleague from Cowichan—Malahat—Langford has said, the NDP supports this bill and knows it can raise other key areas too, to encourage the government to establish more food security initiatives in Canada. Farming is one of those areas. My colleague has said that farmers can be one of our greatest tools in effectively combatting climate change, alongside feeding the world, and that with the enactment of this bill, farmers will become part of our national discourse.

In Canada, we have extensive arable land where food can be grown. We produce far more food than our population consumes. We are net exporters. We are one of the top agricultural producers in the world, and that is something we should definitely talk about more.

For example, do members know that Canada is the largest producer of lentils in the world? We produce almost twice as much as India. Between our two countries, we produce more than 50% of world's lentils, yet per capita, Canadians eat very few. That is a shame because lentils are high in protein and fibre and low in fat and calories. They are naturally gluten-free and have an exceptionally low glycemic index, making them suitable for a diabetic diet. The majority of Canadians do not know this.

From coast to coast to coast, Canada has local food that needs to be shared and eaten. We are a country with the ability to produce food locally for everyone, not just to give the bare minimum amount but to achieve the good, high-quality food we all need. We need that high level of nutrition. It is a very strong factor in the social determinants of health.

As New Democrats, a strong food system has been a central issue for us. In 2011, we ran on a commitment to introduce a Canadian food strategy that would combine health and environmental goals. We created a strategy called “Everybody eats: Our vision for a pan-Canadian food strategy”, which focused on how food travels from the farm to the factory to the fork. It was comprehensive, and it forced the Liberals to act. It is now time for the Liberal government to do more to protect Canadian food systems in the new reality of increasing climate disasters.

I think about the recent devastating flood in B.C. that wiped out roads and limited supply chains for weeks, as food could not get in and out of the Lower Mainland. Realities like that are why this government needs to understand how and where food is grown and produced in Canada.

This bill has the potential to direct the Liberals to look at the concept of food miles and how far food goes to reach a table. Today our food is travelling long distances to make it to our plates. That is not food resiliency. In B.C., we have the ability to grow a lot of seasonal produce, and we need to understand those opportunities and build resiliency around them.

In closing, it is important that this bill be part of the journey, not the end of it. We have much work to do to build and rebuild resilient food infrastructure in this country. We have relied too much on imports for decades while letting our own food production dwindle, and we need to bring more food closer to home. We also need to reduce the amount of food we waste. That is why, in November 2022, I moved to introduce Bill C-304, an act to establish national food waste awareness day. I thank the member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford for seconding that bill.

Having a day to recognize the impacts of wasted food on food insecurity and climate change will raise awareness, inspire change and contribute to a meaningful solution to make Canada's food system more secure. Each year, 60% of the food produced in Canada is thrown out, and half of it is fresh, edible and nutritious food that could help feed four million Canadians, one million of whom are children, who are struggling daily with access to healthy food. It would be one more tool we have in our policy tool box to remind Canadians of how important local food is, celebrate the farmers who produce it and start a conversation on how we, as parliamentarians, can better support food security so everybody has access to high-quality food and no one goes to bed hungry.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

That's right. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As we're talking about this date, just to clarify for the witnesses we have here today, at the very beginning of the meeting, the government side put together a motion to amend when they wanted amendments from the committee. Basically, what it did was.... Conversation happened, and we realized that we would not have all the written testimony before we were able to write whatever amendments we wanted. We heard from the clerk that we've received only half the written submissions. They didn't have a timeline as to how long that was going to take.

The motion was dropped at the very beginning of the committee. There was no written notice, as is the usual precedent, and there were no conversations with us. It was literally dropped. We heard that we wouldn't even have the written submissions, yet we as members of Parliament were then to go away and potentially write up amendments.

The government wanted to move that deadline closer. We would actually be writing amendments without having all the information from Canadians who have written in submissions. They're sitting with the clerk's office right now. They do great work, but it takes time to translate. We put in an amendment to say let's discuss this when we had the committee time scheduled to do this.

Just so you're aware, the NDP and the Liberals voted against that, which is why we're here. We actually wanted to push it ahead for when we had time allocated. Now we're dealing with a situation where we have another amendment, when we're looking at our timelines here, in order to be able to do what's called clause-by-clause. We think we've made a very reasonable request by giving a little bit of extra time so that we can properly review things. That's where the discussion is.

This is all just so that our witnesses who are here are aware of what's going on. It's the reason we're in this place here.

Talking about the timeline, I know that the government representatives made comments about missing days. I just want to note that one of the reasons we missed some committee time was that the government tabled their budget. That's all in the government's timeline. That was their choice when they tabled the budget. That is why we had a committee meeting cancelled.

Here we are now, sort of pushing everything ahead, but still, with the original motion we had, there were no specific dates given. There were discussions, but there were no specific dates as to when, specifically, we would be doing the amendments and then the clause-by-clause. Having this new information is why we're discussing the amendment. It's in order to have proper time to review all the potential amendments that might come from different parties, to be able to have the time to review them and to then start the clause-by-clause within a more reasonable time period.

As I mentioned earlier, but it is applicable now, when we were doing Bill C-22, we had members not on this committee who put forth amendments. All of that takes time. We need time to go through them and prioritize them. The clerk needs time to prioritize them and see what similarities there are or if there are duplications.

Moving ahead, based on the amendment my colleague moved, to literally just give us a few more days is very reasonable. In terms of the amount of time it takes to potentially go through whatever amendments might be presented, we don't know. There could be one or there could be a hundred. We need time to do that. I think the request to just give a little bit more time is very reasonable.

I think the date my colleague gave was very reasonable. It's not like she gave a date that was at the end of May. It was literally just a few extra days so that we would have time to go through whatever amendments might come forward.

The date that she's—

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is really all about giving members enough time to listen to the witnesses.

When we're looking at the timeline right now, moving the clause-by-clause and actually pushing it further ahead is reasonable because the actual motion that we're debating here today talks about independent members. They're listed right in the motion. In fact, that gives the members who aren't sitting on this committee very little time.

In fact, moving the clause-by-clause forward a bit more does give members, other than the people sitting on this committee, time to look at this. I think that is reasonable for the motion that Ms. Ferreri put forth. This is really allowing us enough time to have proper scrutiny, not only for the people on this committee but also the independent members who don't sit here every day.

We heard from some other members that they sit on two or three committees, plus there's all the other work that we have to do. This would really allow everyone...because all members do have an opportunity to put in amendments.

I know that when we were doing Bill C-22, a member who doesn't sit on this committee brought forth numerous amendments. A number of those were debated. There was—I can't remember the exact number; I know for sure there was one that everyone voted on—an amendment that was actually then put into the legislation. That's why it's really important to allow all members, including independent members, to have the proper time to really scrutinize what this is and be able to put their amendments in.

We also know, Mr. Chair, that it takes time. You can't just write amendments overnight. It has to go to legal. It's really important that we get it right—for us at this committee and also for independent members. Moving that date ahead, to look at clause....

Then of course the clerk has to.... We don't know how many amendments are coming forth. It could be one. It could be a hundred. We really don't know. We see that with other legislation. The clerk's office has to be able to put everything together and categorize it. When we had it for Bill C-22, they were kind of looking at amendments from different people, parties and individuals that were similar. It all gets categorized. You can't just do that in a couple of hours. We really do need the time to do this.

The other thing is that the clerk does have to prioritize amendments. They really look at where there are duplications and which ones would come up before others because of who submits an amendment first.

There's a lot to consider, so to try to rush this all into a couple of days for an important piece of legislation like this.... It's not just a private member's bill with a couple of lines. We're talking about a substantive piece of legislation, so it's really important that we do this properly.

I'm in support of extending the timeline on this so at least we can have time to go through the amendments. Again, we don't know how many there will be. There could be a substantial number of amendments. Also, it's talking to other members here. I know that on Bill C-22.... We have different people on the committee here, but I had a great working relationship with my counterpart on the Liberal side. We would look at what some ideas were...of course without disclosing confidences, but just looking at ideas. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened here so far with this piece of legislation.

We had this dropped on us today without any type of conversation, so to hear members talking about working collaboratively and good intentions.... There were no preconversations here.

However, that's an aside. Going back to the amendment that we're discussing here, I think it's very reasonable to look at the timeline.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Having just arrived on the committee specifically for Bill C-35, I don't really have a point of reference on Bill C-22. I have noticed that chunks of testimonies and submissions are coming in. I'd like to ask the clerk if these submissions in translation were after the March 17 deadline date, the ones that are being submitted now.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

That in itself means that we are asked to come up with amendments, potentially, on this very important piece of legislation without having all of the submissions from stakeholders across the country: from individual people, from organizations or from anyone who wants to speak on this.

Normally when we're dealing with this type of situation, we would wait until we have all of those submissions in. We've just heard that we don't know when we'll be getting all of those, so to bump up the timeline even sooner for potential amendments.... Those take time. We have to send them in. They have to be properly worded. That work takes time. We do have a timeline here that we're working towards.

This is a little bit of of déjà vu, like when we had Bill C-22. We had all of those people who were sending in submissions, and we didn't even have all of them by the time we were working on it. We didn't get all of them by the deadline for when we had to come up with potential amendments, and then we were working on the clause-by-clause. That was really unreasonable.

Here we are again. It's déjà vu. We're in a situation where we're being asked to rush things along. We don't want to delay this at all, but out of respect for all of the people who have sent in submissions, it's not appropriate and it's not respectful to them to not even have all of their information to us before we can come up with potential amendments here. That's just a really unreasonable request. I question why we're here.

We have a timeline that we're working towards. If anything, we should be bumping ahead on the clause-by-clause, because even the timeline itself is really tight for when we need to have the amendments in and then we're doing the clause-by-clause. It's really only a couple of days. Right now, we have to have the amendments in, and then the clerks have to do their work, get to us and then look at clause-by-clause. It's just really unreasonable that we don't even have all of the testimony in, and we're being asked to start making those decisions that do take time.

That just seems really unreasonable, and the clerk doesn't even have an idea, as we just heard. A few days so we can properly do this, so we can properly have all the information, would be appropriate. As well, we have to remember that the agreements with the provinces are signed, so it's not like there's a delay in anything. The agreements are already signed. It's not like they're waiting for this legislation to then have the government go and start negotiating agreements with the provinces. Here we are solidifying things, and we have our due diligence to do.

I'll leave it there. I might come back, but I'll leave it there, Mr. Chair.